Loon Running for Office in Oregon

We should restart above-ground nuclear testing because “a little radiation is a good thing for the human body.”

He wants to “dissolve radioactive waste in water”, and “sprinkle radiation over our oceans and over America”.

AIDS is fake, and just a collection of other diseases given the term “AIDS”, and that “AIDS may be little more than a general classification of deaths resulting from exposure to homosexual behavior.”

Global warming is fake and claims that the number of scientists who agree with him outnumber the amount of scientists who disagree with him (a notion so easily disproven it’s not even worth bothering to shoot down).

Note if you will that he characterizes Ms. Maddow as “incapable of understanding his scientific theories,” thereby implying that Rachel is stupid. Rachel Maddow is of course a Rhodes Scholar who’s been accused of many things, but being stupid is not the first thing that leaps to mind when referring to her. Hot? Yes definitely. Stupid? Uh… NO.

Also observe that one reason why he can’t hear her questions, is that he’s far too busy screaming at her to, “Get off his lawn!” like a crazy person. Apparently, he did not receive the lesson that my mother gave her elementary school children, that “you cannot listen and speak at the same time.” Perhaps if Mr. Robinson would just STFU and listen occasionally, he might understand the world around him a little better.

As for the him “being a good scientist” part…. well I would beg to differ if he believes ANY of the bullet points listed above. But the part about his AIDS beliefs were particularly nauseating.

AIDS has infected 33.2 million people worldwide, and it’s killed over 300,000 children. But in as late as 1995, this goober was arguing what — that their disease was the result of their “homosexual behavior”? Really? Kids who haven’t even hit puberty yet are hitting the gay bars or cruising WEHO for a piece of ass?? SERIOUSLY???

Joking aside, by 1983, Luc Montagnier’s team at the Pasteur Institute in Paris had positively identified the AIDS retrovirus as the cause of AIDS, so for this Robinson douche to still hold the views he held in 1995 is bad enough, but for him to claim there was still a “debate” about the cause of AIDS at that point in history is not just false, it’s patently absurd. And if he was spreading that trash idea by that point, I’d argue it was also scientific misconduct at best, and criminally negligent at worst. Right up there with morons in the Catholic Church who advocate against condom use in Africa — advice which in that region is tantamount to committing genocide.

And furthermore, what idiotic school was allowing this wackjob to teach science at their institution? At Jerry Falwell’s “evolution is just a theory” Liberty University, maybe?

This is the kind of douche upon which global warming deniers hang their hats and say stupid nonsense like, “Alternative views are being ignored in the scientific community!”

Well, YEAH, because those “views” have very little if anything to do with real science, and are spewed by a very small contingent of batshit crazy LOONS, and oil company SHILLS who are paid to LIE.

THUS, the being ignored part…..

And my favorite part about that too is that this guy by his own admission is a “physical scientist” not a climatologist, or a virologist, much less a behavioral scientist, geneticist, or a neurobiologist, so on BOTH the global climate change and AIDS/homosexuality counts, these are NOT HIS SPECIALITIES, and therefore cannot speak as authoritatively as those for whom it is their entire career focus of research.

He seriously needs to just pack up, and go back home. A rest home. Preferably with nice, fluffy, padded rooms. No sharp edges. And he needs to take all the other crazies running for office this year with him. What we need right now are clam, reasonable, RATIONAL individuals who can untangle the massive, complex problems we’re facing.

Very poor show 5by5,I read your ranting editorial for a couple of paragraphs but the caps are incredibly unprofessional and offputting. I’d vote for the fucker to spite you just for that. But I did go back and read your diatribe after watching.Anyone with 20 minutes of their life to waste (x2 in my case because your amatuer post riled me up so much) by watching the clip can plainly see that his “shouting” is caused by the sound engineers turning up the volume on his audio. You’d have to be fanatical or ignorant not to see that.On a second viewing it’s patently obvious that the woman is feigning ignorance of the feed’s delay in order to make the interviewee sound unreasonable in the first few minutes. Then at the end she criticizes him for being ignorant of it!She digs out things he wrote about AIDS in 1995? Holy shit.:You claim “Joking aside, by 1983, Luc Montagnier’s team at the Pasteur Institute in Paris had positively identified the AIDS retrovirus as the cause of AIDS”That is bullshit. You must be incredibly young or ignorant if you actually believe that there was no difference of opinion on the causes of acquired human immunodeficiency symdrome. There are questions even now. There is no such thing as settled science.She bangs on about $150,000 dollars spent on his advertising while his opponents are spending $millions? How rich.The United States armed forces have been shooting depleted Uranium (a.k.a. nuclear waste) around the Middle East and central Asia for nearly a decade now. The artillary shells they use turn to vapour when they explode. They use rifle bullets made of radioactive waste now too.And you bullet point “He wants to “dissolve radioactive waste in water”, and “sprinkle radiation over our oceans and over America”.Like it’s a fact? Show me where he said such a thing. Show me evidence that the US military aren’t doing it right now in Iraq and Afghaistan. http://www.google.ie/images?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&hl=en&source=imghp&biw=853&bih=554&q=birth+defect+in+fallujah&gbv=2&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=”Everybody viewing this programme knows exactly what you’re doing” Art Robinson (I had to read his name from the video because you never bothered to mention it in the rant.). Only sad and easily led supporters of the two-party system wouldn’t apparently.Despite your fawning, at least one Rhodes scholar has no idea what sacasm means, even though they deploy it a lot and accuse others of not knwoing what it means..If you’re impressed by Rhodes scholars you should check out this bitchin’ podcast* about one of them by the best in the business:http://disinfo.com/2007/12/smuggling-cocaine-for-the-cia/Are you a hardcore Democrat 5by5? You must be because all he could do is split the Republican vote in your favour. Unless he gets elected, that is.More likely . . . heh, neverrmind.

*Actually it was live radio, don’t call the number!

FergalR

Very poor show 5by5,I read your ranting editorial for a couple of paragraphs but the caps are incredibly unprofessional and offputting. I’d vote for the fucker to spite you just for that. But I did go back and read your diatribe after watching.Anyone with 20 minutes of their life to waste (x2 in my case because your amatuer post riled me up so much) by watching the clip can plainly see that his “shouting” is caused by the sound engineers turning up the volume on his audio. You’d have to be fanatical or ignorant not to see that.On a second viewing it’s patently obvious that the woman is feigning ignorance of the feed’s delay in order to make the interviewee sound unreasonable in the first few minutes. Then at the end she criticizes him for being ignorant of it!She digs out things he wrote about AIDS in 1995? Holy shit.:You claim “Joking aside, by 1983, Luc Montagnier’s team at the Pasteur Institute in Paris had positively identified the AIDS retrovirus as the cause of AIDS”That is bullshit. You must be incredibly young or ignorant if you actually believe that there was no difference of opinion on the causes of acquired human immunodeficiency symdrome. There are questions even now. There is no such thing as settled science.She bangs on about $150,000 dollars spent on his advertising while his opponents are spending $millions? How rich.The United States armed forces have been shooting depleted Uranium (a.k.a. nuclear waste) around the Middle East and central Asia for nearly a decade now. The artillary shells they use turn to vapour when they explode. They use rifle bullets made of radioactive waste now too.And you bullet point “He wants to “dissolve radioactive waste in water”, and “sprinkle radiation over our oceans and over America”.Like it’s a fact? Show me where he said such a thing. Show me evidence that the US military aren’t doing it right now in Iraq and Afghaistan. http://www.google.ie/images?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&hl=en&source=imghp&biw=853&bih=554&q=birth+defect+in+fallujah&gbv=2&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=”Everybody viewing this programme knows exactly what you’re doing” Art Robinson (I had to read his name from the video because you never bothered to mention it in the rant.). Only sad and easily led supporters of the two-party system wouldn’t apparently.Despite your fawning, at least one Rhodes scholar has no idea what sacasm means, even though they deploy it a lot and accuse others of not knwoing what it means..If you’re impressed by Rhodes scholars you should check out this bitchin’ podcast* about one of them by the best in the business:http://www.disinfo.com/2007/12/smuggling-cocaine-for-the-cia/Are you a hardcore Democrat 5by5? You must be because all he could do is split the Republican vote in your favour. Unless he gets elected, that is.More likely . . . heh, neverrmind.

*Actually it was live radio, don’t call the number!

gemmarama

are you fucking serious?!

if you came to these conclusions after wathing this video twice your comprehension skills need some work mate. i watched it once and found this psycho so infuriating i chain-smoked all the way through.

you’d vote for somebody out of spite? then you shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

the guy is clearly shouting.

he interrupts her, talks over her, and patronises her for the whole interview. she interrupts him once towards the end and apparently she’s the one at fault. i say respect for keeping her cool so well, i would’ve cut the interview after the first two minutes as this asshole is clearly incapable of holding a civilised conversation.

i think you’ll find there is such a thing as scientific proof. so what do you think causes AIDS then, doctor?

the crucial issue with his donation, that neither you nor he seem to grasp, is that it was supposedly anonymous.

your paragraph concerning his bizarre theories about radiation begins by stating the US military are doing the same, then asks for proof of his beliefs. erm… she was quoting his own newsletter. you then go back to the fact that the US military are doing the same. so please clarify: do you believe that he didn’t say these things? or that the US military are spreading radiation too so this makes his claims ok?

you clearly have no idea what sarcasm is either. he accuses her several times of using sarcasm when she has literally just asked him a straightforward question.

do you have some kind of intellectual biterness towards rhodes scholars?

do you seriously think there is such a thing as a “hardcore democrat”? the US democratic party is centre-left, in case you hadn’t realised.

as for your comments below, i detect the same sinister vein of misogyny and homophobia that clearly runs through this interview. why does it even matter whether this woman is attractive or not? it is completely irrelevant and should not even be a subject open for debate.

fergalR: the new vox penii. discuss…

FergalR

Whoa, relax lady.

5by5 was the one who brought up her alleged attractiveness. She’s horrendous.

You should really watch it again if you were fooled, maybe the smoke got in your eyes? When people shout they look like they’re shouting.

The US military is spreading nuclear watse – right now – with their munitions. Little miss Rhodes is reading something writtten a decade or more ago. Give her a call and ask her to post it online so we can read it in context. Maybe he’s right?

The science of HIV/AIDS was in no way universally accepted in 1995. If it were well understood now we’d have a cure.

I wouldn’t trust a single thing that Cecil Rhodes’ money produced.

Like I told Liam the other day, gays are great.

If you don’t think she was being sarcastic then you must have watched the wrong clip.

I’ll vote however I please and you won’t take it away from me, woman.

5by5

FergalR: “5by5 was the one who brought up her alleged attractiveness. She’s horrendous.”

To me, smart is always hot. And she’s wicked smart. Thus, the hotness. Plus, she has a nice smile, and bright eyes.

But mileage varies. Perhaps you prefer the dumb stripper working the naughty librarian/dominatrix look that Sarah Palin is sporting.

Eye of the beholder and all that….

FergalR

Good Lord no. Palin’s a dog too.

This is your opinion: “To me, smart is always hot. And she’s wicked smart.” and that’s all it is.

gemmarama

you should both be ashamed of yourselves.

i don’t see any male politicians having their perceived “attractiveness” debated on a supposedly left-wing, intelligent comments board.

it is not your god-given right, as men, to assess the sexual appeal of any woman who happens to be in the public eye, and it disgusts me that i’m actually having to tell you this. the female body does not “belong” to you, and women do not invite your scrutiny or desire your approval.

grow up.

manitoidman

Damn, with all the comments I have seen you post, I am guessing that you are quite the man hater….
not that I blame you in some ways, but women do invite our scrutiny and desire our approval.
That is why they wear and buy what they do. That is why the Hair and Spa and fashion industry is a multi-billion dollar industry. I don’t necessarily believe it’s right..but it’s the truth.
I mean just look at the thong bathing suit…do you seriously think that woman feel forced to wear them?
They wear them to seek APPROVAL from men. Enough said.
Stop hating men because someone was an ass to you!

gemmarama

ah, the cheapest shot of the lot: call the feminist a man-hater. why don’t you try formulating an argument instead of hurling playground insults?

about 90% of my friends are straight men, so, uh, no. plus i have a very nice, very big, very masculine boyfriend, so where does that leave your genius theory?

your hopelessly naive, nay RETARDED take on gender politics would make me laugh if it wasn’t so depressing. are you sure you’ve got the right site? i mean, surely you should be on “nuts” magazine farting out opinions on football and swimsuit models and scratching your balls occasionally to help you “think”.

so yeah, whilst it might be easier for you to assume that someone who hates you personally just hates ALL men, i’m afraid you’re sorely mistaken in this particular case. i LOVE real men. i just hate misogynistic, sexually inadequate little runts like you. man the fuck up.

moderator, can we do something about these clowns?

manitoidman

Actually, I don’t think I was being cheap at all. Just truthful.
Your hate spewing is really not necessary.
I have nothing against feminist and worship the goddess myself.
I treat ever PERSON as an equal.
I am past the ego.
If you really read what I said…I don’t agree with it..it’s just the way it is right now.
I didn’t call you names or degrade you, just made an assumption…most woman that talk as you do…Hate Men.
And yes MODERATOR can we do something about this….personal attacks for no reason….every comment she makes is rude, and degrading to men.

gemmarama

as much fun as this has been, you really are beyond help.

i have better things to do than explain the myriad ways in which you are wrong, wrong, wrong.

you may care to note that it is YOUR comment that has been removed, not mine.

nighty night fool.

dumbsaint

you ‘treat everyone equal’ but don’t consider that women might be motivated to look good, be healthy, buy shit solely for themselves. Instead “they wear them to seek approval from men”.

Just one of the ways in which you are demonstrably retarded.

FergalR

Oh, and, darling.

There is no such thing as scientific proof – except perhaps in the legal sense in criminal trials.

You might be thinking of mathematical proof?

gemmarama

don’t call me darling, you odious prick.

i’m afraid you’re still wrong.

i’d argue further but i got a butt-fuck town to get outta this morning.

adios, sweetheart.

(more sarcasm).

FergalR

Argue further, love?

You didn’t argue. There is no such thing as scientific proof. Go ask a scientist.

Your town sounds awful.

gemmarama

you are only embarrassing yourself by employing such a patronisingly misogynistic tone.

i know that when you have a small dick it hurts to be put in your place by a woman, but as you didn’t actually manage to respond intelligently to any of the points i made i don’t think i’m the one who can be accused of “not arguing.”

it’s not my town, i happened to be working there for eight months, plus i didn’t exactly say a lot about it, so your attempt at some kinda personal high-school-level dig is pretty lame. guess you were never top of the debate class, hey?

notfooledbythemedia

Rachel Maddow is overrated regardless of where she studied or what she is.

Sly

Your the only one here that made sense. Like prisonplanet most of these writers are complete morons. Its nice to see someone has a brain.

James Inman

Yeah if Rachel Maddow cares so much about radiation she should be doing stories about depleted uranium used in Iraq. Instead she just responds to crazy Republicans and the silly things they say. Yeah we know they’re stupid. Now move on to what’s going on right now. Give us information, independent reporting and solutions to real problems. Most of the so called left is just reacting to what the crazy republicans are saying. The liberals know how to act offended but there’s no real revolution.

5by5

I would agree that she should do stories about depleted uranium used in munitions in Iraq and Afghanistan, especially considering that it’s led to a 1000% increase in cancer rates in that region of the world.

Which is probably why she interviewed Democratic Congressman Jim McDermott on Air America about that very subject back in March 2006, in conjunction with his collaboration with the punk band Anti-Flag, and their song “Depleted Uranium is a Crime” as a part of their “For Blood & Empire” album release. McDermott then went on 3 months later to pass the Depleted Uranium Study Amendment and received praise and thanks for that from AMVETS.

But yes, I would appreciate more discussion about that as well, especially since it has a half-life of 3.5 billion years, and it’s usage basically marks the introduction of a permanently available contaminant into the environment. I mean, when a ZDF TV crew from Germany can walk up to a blown up American tank from the FIRST Gulf War and have geiger counter readings go off the chart from 2 ft away, yeah. It’s a problem.

Anonymous

@______@

nemoide

@______@

Andrew

I heard that last night and I’m not fucking listening to it again. They both performed very badly, and the “interview” is about as worth listening to as two children fighting by chanting “LA LA LA I CAN’T HEAR YOU!” at each other for TWENTY GOD DAMN MINUTES.

Andrew

I heard that last night and I’m not fucking listening to it again. They both performed very badly, and the “interview” is about as worth listening to as two children fighting by chanting “LA LA LA I CAN’T HEAR YOU!” at each other for TWENTY GOD DAMN MINUTES.

notfooledbythemedia

She is horrible as an interviewer. It was all her fault. She’s the host.

Andrew

I thought conservatives were supposed to take personal responsibility and not play the victim. (I’m kidding, I know they do it all the time.) No, only her paragraph long loaded questions are her responsibility. His non-answers (like changing the subject to his opponent’s record like all politicians do) are his responsibility. And they share responsibility for talking over each other. The mature thing to do is recognize both sides play a part. Unfortunately, I bet they both believe they did well.

Laura

This title is misleading. This woman is manipulative.

Laura

This title is misleading. This woman is manipulative.

http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

Not to break any dearly held delusions…but loons are running for office in more places than Oregon…and in larger numbers than ever before. The sole difference between now and yesteryear is that they have a groundswell of support from the vast reservoir of stupid people who are thrilled to hear someone announce that they are ‘real’ Americans…and everyone else is just closet commies who snuck in under the wire at some point.

http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

Not to break any dearly held delusions…but loons are running for office in more places than Oregon…and in larger numbers than ever before. The sole difference between now and yesteryear is that they have a groundswell of support from the vast reservoir of stupid people who are thrilled to hear someone announce that they are ‘real’ Americans…and everyone else is just closet commies who snuck in under the wire at some point.

Cheesefania

That was painful to watch. I’m not a fan of Maddow, but I felt her pain in that “interview.” If the candidate was going to spend the majority of the time talking over the interviewer, he could have at least used the opportunity, on a nationally televised program, to state what it is he actually stands for, rather than immediately going on the defensive, smearing the interviewer, and only referring to what his opponent has done during his political tenure, and not to any specifics regarding what he plans to do differently. If he can’t even conduct himself in a composed and rational manner during a major television interview, why would anyone think he could engage in rational political discourse at the state level? He presumably wouldn’t get away with such behavior in the state house, should he be elected. He claims not to be a politician, well I hate to break it to him, but he’s running for office, so he’s a politician now, whether he wants to admit it or not. And what if he had said, “I hate black people,” or gays, or jews, fifteen years ago. Should he not still be held accountable because it was too long ago? Should we just assume that the shelf life of an opinion or belief is limited to less than fifteen years? I think not, and that is an opinion I have held for longer than fifteen years.

Cheesefania

That was painful to watch. I’m not a fan of Maddow, but I felt her pain in that “interview.” If the candidate was going to spend the majority of the time talking over the interviewer, he could have at least used the opportunity, on a nationally televised program, to state what it is he actually stands for, rather than immediately going on the defensive, smearing the interviewer, and only referring to what his opponent has done during his political tenure, and not to any specifics regarding what he plans to do differently. If he can’t even conduct himself in a composed and rational manner during a major television interview, why would anyone think he could engage in rational political discourse at the state level? He presumably wouldn’t get away with such behavior in the state house, should he be elected. He claims not to be a politician, well I hate to break it to him, but he’s running for office, so he’s a politician now, whether he wants to admit it or not. And what if he had said, “I hate black people,” or gays, or jews, fifteen years ago. Should he not still be held accountable because it was too long ago? Should we just assume that the shelf life of an opinion or belief is limited to less than fifteen years? I think not, and that is an opinion I have held for longer than fifteen years.

gemmarama

are you fucking serious?!

if you came to these conclusions after wathing this video twice your comprehension skills need some work mate. i watched it once and found this psycho so infuriating i chain-smoked all the way through.

you’d vote for somebody out of spite? then you shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

the guy is clearly shouting.

he interrupts her, talks over her, and patronises her for the whole interview. she interrupts him once towards the end and apparently she’s the one at fault. i say respect for keeping her cool so well, i would’ve cut the interview after the first two minutes as this asshole is clearly incapable of holding a civilised conversation.

i think you’ll find there is such a thing as scientific proof. so what do you think causes AIDS then, doctor?

the crucial issue with his donation, that neither you nor he seem to grasp, is that it was supposedly anonymous.

your paragraph concerning his bizarre theories about radiation begins by stating the US military are doing the same, then asks for proof of his beliefs. erm… she was quoting his own newsletter. you then go back to the fact that the US military are doing the same. so please clarify: do you believe that he didn’t say these things? or that the US military are spreading radiation too so this makes his claims ok?

you clearly have no idea what sarcasm is either. he accuses her several times of using sarcasm when she has literally just asked him a straightforward question.

do you have some kind of intellectual biterness towards rhodes scholars?

do you seriously think there is such a thing as a “hardcore democrat”? the US democratic party is centre-left, in case you hadn’t realised.

as for your comments below, i detect the same sinister vein of misogyny and homophobia that clearly runs through this interview. why does it even matter whether this woman is attractive or not? it is completely irrelevant and should not even be a subject open for debate.

fergalR: the new vox penii. discuss…

Anonymous

Actually….and I hate to break it to all you sheeple out there…..
Global Warming is Not Man Made!!
The planet goes through cycles and we are in one.
It is very convenient to use the excuse that “we” cause the climate change, so that the literally thousands of “Eco” friendly products that are hitting the market will sell like hotcakes.
Don’t get me wrong…I am all for eco friendly products and use solar power and biodegradable products whenever possible. The world is not our trash heap.
Just don’t lie to us about what the causes are.
And I don’t think this guy is a nut-job for thinking Aids was man made. All evidence points to it.

manitoidman

Actually….and I hate to break it to all you sheeple out there…..
Global Warming is Not Man Made!!
The planet goes through cycles and we are in one.
It is very convenient to use the excuse that “we” cause the climate change, so that the literally thousands of “Eco” friendly products that are hitting the market will sell like hotcakes.
Don’t get me wrong…I am all for eco friendly products and use solar power and biodegradable products whenever possible. The world is not our trash heap.
Just don’t lie to us about what the causes are.
And I don’t think this guy is a nut-job for thinking Aids was man made. All evidence points to it.

gemmarama

he doesn’t say AIDS was man-made. he says it’s a result of “exposure to homosexual behaviour”, which is an entirely different matter…

at least read shit before you comment hey?

manitoidman

You have to much time on your hands.
If you do some research other than just watching the vid, you’ll see that he was one of the biologist who covered it up.
Post a positive comment…I dare you!

gemmarama

i’m very busy actually; just us women are quite skilled at multi-tasking, you know…you rely too much on personal insults rather than intelligent arguments.citations to back up your claim?give me something to comment positively on and i’ll do so. as long as i keep getting your woman-hating bile (which i don’t see being dished out to any male commenters, go figure…), i’ll keep fighting back. you called down the thunder, you semi-literate loser.try and post a comment without any idiotic typos… i dare you!

gemmarama

he doesn’t say AIDS was man-made. he says it’s a result of “exposure to homosexual behaviour”, which is an entirely different matter…

at least read shit before you comment hey?

John

wow. That was profoundly annoying.

John

wow. That was profoundly annoying.

Sly

Your the only one here that made sense. Like prisonplanet most of these writers are complete morons. Its nice to see someone has a brain.

squatchie

I live in Oregon and I am ashamed that this person represents a number of deranged viewpoints help by our citizens.

squatchie

I live in Oregon and I am ashamed that this person represents a number of deranged viewpoints help by our citizens.

FergalR

I hope he gets elected. Wise man.

Anonymous

Whoa, relax lady.

5by5 was the one who brought up her alleged attractiveness. She’s horrendous.

You should really watch it again if you were fooled, maybe the smoke got in your eyes? When people shout they look like they’re shouting.

The US military is spreading nuclear watse – right now – with their munitions. Little miss Rhodes is reading something writtten a decade or more ago. Give her a call and ask her to post it online so we can read it in context. Maybe he’s right?

The science of HIV/AIDS was in no way universally accepted in 1995. If it were well understood now we’d have a cure.

I wouldn’t trust a single thing that Cecil Rhodes’ money produced.

Like I told Liam the other day, gays are great.

If you don’t think she was being sarcastic then you must have watched the wrong clip.

I’ll vote however I please and you won’t take it away from me, woman.

Anonymous

Oh, and, darling.

There is no such thing as scientific proof – except perhaps in the legal sense in criminal trials.

You might be thinking of mathematical proof?

Hunter_Rose5

whatever this guy is….i dont put too much stock in anything associated with ms maddow.shes a bit too skewed and biased for me.pretty good at taking things out of context.

Hunter_Rose5

whatever this guy is….i dont put too much stock in anything associated with ms maddow.shes a bit too skewed and biased for me.pretty good at taking things out of context.

gemmarama

don’t call me darling, you odious prick.

i’m afraid you’re still wrong.

i’d argue further but i got a butt-fuck town to get outta this morning.

adios, sweetheart.

(more sarcasm).

Armando Gomez

The interview with Rachel Maddow and Art Robinson is the current discourse of right-wing obfuscation tack. Simply put, you talk over your interviewer, not letting Maddow get in a word or a question in edgewise; to drown out any discovery of discourse so that Robinson wouldn’t find himself cornered by his own words. This is the very herb of the Tea Party: the more obnoxious you are, the more the Party considers you political material. But for the general media this interview was a rare example. Why? The most questionable Tea Party candidates are not entering into any debate prior the November elections. Too many have already suffered from foot-in-mouth disease.

Armando Gomez

The interview with Rachel Maddow and Art Robinson is the current discourse of right-wing obfuscation tack. Simply put, you talk over your interviewer, not letting Maddow get in a word or a question in edgewise; to drown out any discovery of discourse so that Robinson wouldn’t find himself cornered by his own words. This is the very herb of the Tea Party: the more obnoxious you are, the more the Party considers you political material. But for the general media this interview was a rare example. Why? The most questionable Tea Party candidates are not entering into any debate prior the November elections. Too many have already suffered from foot-in-mouth disease.

James Inman

Yeah if Rachel Maddow cares so much about radiation she should be doing stories about depleted uranium used in Iraq. Instead she just responds to crazy Republicans and the silly things they say. Yeah we know they’re stupid. Now move on to what’s going on right now. Give us information, independent reporting and solutions to real problems. Most of the so called left is just reacting to what the crazy republicans are saying. The liberals know how to act offended but there’s no real revolution.

Anonymous

Argue further, love?

You didn’t argue. There is no such thing as scientific proof. Go ask a scientist.

Your town sounds awful.

Anonymous

FergalR: “Anyone…watching the clip can plainly see that his “shouting” is caused by the sound engineers turning up the volume on his audio. You’d have to be fanatical or ignorant not to see that.”Yeah, it couldn’t possibly be that he just raised his voice. FergalR: “On a second viewing it’s patently obvious that the woman is feigning ignorance of the feed’s delay in order to make the interviewee sound unreasonable in the first few minutes. Then at the end she criticizes him for being ignorant of it!”LOL. Actually, I thought that was her throwing him a bone, and giving him an opportunity to make an excuse for his being rude and talking over her repeatedly. The truth is, he was simply following a tactic used by the rightwing all over media, namely to talk over the liberal on the panel, or the interviewer who’s asking an uncomfortable question. Meanwhile that other person typically will wait for them to finish a statement before speaking, with the net result being that only the conservative argument is being heard. That pattern is repeated on multiple shows, so what’s more surprising is that she tried to give him an out, and a chance to pretend he wasn’t just being a rude douche.FergalR: “There is no such thing as settled science.”Then I invite you to jump off a cliff without benefit of a parachute and disprove the settled science of gravity. It’s just a theory, after all.FergalR: “Are you a hardcore Democrat 5by5?”Actually, no. I tend to vote Democratic as that’s about as Liberal as it gets in this country (which is to say not very liberal at all), and that (generally) holds the line against radical Republicans who’ve gone off the crazy cliff like this Robinson guy, but I would likely vote (depending upon the individual candidate) Independent, Green Party, or Democratic Socialist if we had the benefit of run-off voting in national elections.FergalR: “You must be because all he could do is split the Republican vote in your favour. Unless he gets elected, that is.”Yes, this guy is good for the Democrats if elections are run fairly, because under normal circumstances, you’re right, he would split the Republican vote into crazy vs. merely conservative. But when you add this crazy to electronic voting machines so easily hacked that people can install frickin’ Pac-Man on them, then things get dangerous.ANYHOW……The point of the interview, which ironically she was unable to get to because this loon was too busy being a loon, is that under normal circumstances, a loon like this would never have the faintest chance in hell of getting elected because he’d have no funds to do things like big media buys. But because of the Supreme Court’s absolutely insane verdict in the Citizen’s United case, now largely anonymous corporate money, and money from foreign governments and corporate entities are actually influencing American elections. THE POINT of her asking whether or not he cared about who these anonymous donors are, is that (especially in the case of donations originating from the Chamber of Commerce) the situation you now have is that Conservatives who spent the past 60 years red-baiting Liberals if they even accepted a leaflet from a Commie, are now taking political donations and being influenced by Commies in China, or donors from countries that sponsor terrorism like Iran, Pakistan, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. Something which frankly should disturb EVERY American, no matter their political stripe.Her point was simply to ask him if he’s concerned about foreign influence over American elections, but she couldn’t get to that because crazy guy was engaged in the crazy, so being unlike say, Larry King, and actually researching her guests prior to interviewing them, and she switched tactics and asked him about other beliefs, thereby giving him the chance to explain why he said what he said. But again, he was too busy being a straight up paranoid who holds positions that in his heart-of-hearts he has to know are indefensible, so he got angry, defensive, generally aggro, and shouted a lot, thereby making himself look like a 5 yr old. His reaction to her questions are not her fault. Presumably he’s in control of himself — but I guess, not so much, huh?

5by5

FergalR: “Anyone…watching the clip can plainly see that his “shouting” is caused by the sound engineers turning up the volume on his audio. You’d have to be fanatical or ignorant not to see that.”Yeah, it couldn’t possibly be that he just raised his voice. FergalR: “On a second viewing it’s patently obvious that the woman is feigning ignorance of the feed’s delay in order to make the interviewee sound unreasonable in the first few minutes. Then at the end she criticizes him for being ignorant of it!”LOL. Actually, I thought that was her throwing him a bone, and giving him an opportunity to make an excuse for his being rude and talking over her repeatedly. The truth is, he was simply following a tactic used by the rightwing all over media, namely to talk over the liberal on the panel, or the interviewer who’s asking an uncomfortable question. Meanwhile that other person typically will wait for them to finish a statement before speaking, with the net result being that only the conservative argument is being heard. That pattern is repeated on multiple shows, so what’s more surprising is that she tried to give him an out, and a chance to pretend he wasn’t just being a rude douche.FergalR: “There is no such thing as settled science.”Then I invite you to jump off a cliff without benefit of a parachute and disprove the settled science of gravity. It’s just a theory, after all.FergalR: “Are you a hardcore Democrat 5by5?”Actually, no. I tend to vote Democratic as that’s about as Liberal as it gets in this country (which is to say not very liberal at all), and that (generally) holds the line against radical Republicans who’ve gone off the crazy cliff like this Robinson guy, but I would likely vote (depending upon the individual candidate) Independent, Green Party, or Democratic Socialist if we had the benefit of run-off voting in national elections.FergalR: “You must be because all he could do is split the Republican vote in your favour. Unless he gets elected, that is.”Yes, this guy is good for the Democrats if elections are run fairly, because under normal circumstances, you’re right, he would split the Republican vote into crazy vs. merely conservative. But when you add this crazy to electronic voting machines so easily hacked that people can install frickin’ Pac-Man on them, then things get dangerous.ANYHOW……The point of the interview, which ironically she was unable to get to because this loon was too busy being a loon, is that under normal circumstances, a loon like this would never have the faintest chance in hell of getting elected because he’d have no funds to do things like big media buys. But because of the Supreme Court’s absolutely insane verdict in the Citizen’s United case, now largely anonymous corporate money, and money from foreign governments and corporate entities are actually influencing American elections. THE POINT of her asking whether or not he cared about who these anonymous donors are, is that (especially in the case of donations originating from the Chamber of Commerce) the situation you now have is that Conservatives who spent the past 60 years red-baiting Liberals if they even accepted a leaflet from a Commie, are now taking political donations and being influenced by Commies in China, or donors from countries that sponsor terrorism like Iran, Pakistan, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. Something which frankly should disturb EVERY American, no matter their political stripe.Her point was simply to ask him if he’s concerned about foreign influence over American elections, but she couldn’t get to that because crazy guy was engaged in the crazy, so being unlike say, Larry King, and actually researching her guests prior to interviewing them, and she switched tactics and asked him about other beliefs, thereby giving him the chance to explain why he said what he said. But again, he was too busy being a straight up paranoid who holds positions that in his heart-of-hearts he has to know are indefensible, so he got angry, defensive, generally aggro, and shouted a lot, thereby making himself look like a 5 yr old. His reaction to her questions are not her fault. Presumably he’s in control of himself — but I guess, not so much, huh?

FergalR

Is it magic mushroom season on your planet too?

FergalR

And, just because you’ve got a kink for borderline geriatrics like Maddcow, doesn’t mean you should expect people to take your rambling editorials seriously.

5by5

LOL! Dude, she’s 37 years old. How the frack does that qualify her for the characterization as a “geriatric”? Do you just fail to know what the word means?

gemmarama

wow, more misogyny. you’re really going all out on this one hey? i’m guessing the secret boner you have for maddow’s making you feel all conflicted, either that or you just got dumped…

5by5

FergalR: “5by5 was the one who brought up her alleged attractiveness. She’s horrendous.”

To me, smart is always hot. And she’s wicked smart. Thus, the hotness. Plus, she has a nice smile, and bright eyes.

But mileage varies. Perhaps you prefer the dumb stripper working the naughty librarian/dominatrix look that Sarah Palin is sporting.

Eye of the beholder and all that….

Anonymous

Good Lord no. Palin’s a dog too.

This is your opinion: “To me, smart is always hot. And she’s wicked smart.” and that’s all it is.

5by5

I would agree that she should do stories about depleted uranium used in munitions in Iraq and Afghanistan, especially considering that it’s led to a 1000% increase in cancer rates in that region of the world.

Which is probably why she interviewed Democratic Congressman Jim McDermott on Air America about that very subject back in March 2006, in conjunction with his collaboration with the punk band Anti-Flag, and their song “Depleted Uranium is a Crime” as a part of their “For Blood & Empire” album release. McDermott then went on 3 months later to pass the Depleted Uranium Study Amendment and received praise and thanks for that from AMVETS.

But yes, I would appreciate more discussion about that as well, especially since it has a half-life of 3.5 billion years, and it’s usage basically marks the introduction of a permanently available contaminant into the environment. I mean, when a ZDF TV crew from Germany can walk up to a blown up American tank from the FIRST Gulf War and have geiger counter readings go off the chart from 2 ft away, yeah. It’s a problem.

notfooledbythemedia

Maddow is awful. How in the world did she even get on such as a low class network as MSNBC?

notfooledbythemedia

Maddow is awful. How in the world did she even get on such as a low class network as MSNBC?

notfooledbythemedia

She is horrible as an interviewer. It was all her fault. She’s the host.

notfooledbythemedia

Rachel Maddow is overrated regardless of where she studied or what she is.

Anonymous

I hope he gets elected. Wise man.

Anonymous

Is it magic mushroom season on your planet too?

Anonymous

And, just because you’ve got a kink for borderline geriatrics like Maddcow, doesn’t mean you should expect people to take your rambling editorials seriously.

Anonymous

LOL! Dude, she’s 37 years old. How the frack does that qualify her for the characterization as a “geriatric”? Do you just fail to know what the word means?

Andrew

I thought conservatives were supposed to take personal responsibility and not play the victim. (I’m kidding, I know they do it all the time.) No, only her paragraph long loaded questions are her responsibility. His non-answers (like changing the subject to his opponent’s record like all politicians do) are his responsibility. And they share responsibility for talking over each other. The mature thing to do is recognize both sides play a part. Unfortunately, I bet they both believe they did well.

gemmarama

you should both be ashamed of yourselves.

i don’t see any male politicians having their perceived “attractiveness” debated on a supposedly left-wing, intelligent comments board.

it is not your god-given right, as men, to assess the sexual appeal of any woman who happens to be in the public eye, and it disgusts me that i’m actually having to tell you this. the female body does not “belong” to you, and women do not invite your scrutiny or desire your approval.

grow up.

gemmarama

you are only embarrassing yourself by employing such a patronisingly misogynistic tone.

i know that when you have a small dick it hurts to be put in your place by a woman, but as you didn’t actually manage to respond intelligently to any of the points i made i don’t think i’m the one who can be accused of “not arguing.”

it’s not my town, i happened to be working there for eight months, plus i didn’t exactly say a lot about it, so your attempt at some kinda personal high-school-level dig is pretty lame. guess you were never top of the debate class, hey?

gemmarama

wow, more misogyny. you’re really going all out on this one hey? i’m guessing the secret boner you have for maddow’s making you feel all conflicted, either that or you just got dumped…

Anonymous

Damn, with all the comments I have seen you post, I am guessing that you are quite the man hater….
not that I blame you in some ways, but women do invite our scrutiny and desire our approval.
That is why they wear and buy what they do. That is why the Hair and Spa and fashion industry is a multi-billion dollar industry. I don’t necessarily believe it’s right..but it’s the truth.
I mean just look at the thong bathing suit…do you seriously think that woman feel forced to wear them?
They wear them to seek APPROVAL from men. Enough said.
Stop hating men because someone was an ass to you!

Anonymous

You have to much time on your hands.
If you do some research other than just watching the vid, you’ll see that he was one of the biologist who covered it up.
Post a positive comment…I dare you!

gemmarama

ah, the cheapest shot of the lot: call the feminist a man-hater. why don’t you try formulating an argument instead of hurling playground insults?

about 90% of my friends are straight men, so, uh, no. plus i have a very nice, very big, very masculine boyfriend, so where does that leave your genius theory?

your hopelessly naive, nay RETARDED take on gender politics would make me laugh if it wasn’t so depressing. are you sure you’ve got the right site? i mean, surely you should be on “nuts” magazine farting out opinions on football and swimsuit models and scratching your balls occasionally to help you “think”.

so yeah, whilst it might be easier for you to assume that someone who hates you personally just hates ALL men, i’m afraid you’re sorely mistaken in this particular case. i LOVE real men. i just hate misogynistic, sexually inadequate little runts like you. man the fuck up.

moderator, can we do something about these clowns?

gemmarama

i’m very busy actually; just us women are quite skilled at multi-tasking, you know…you rely too much on personal insults rather than intelligent arguments.citations to back up your claim?give me something to comment positively on and i’ll do so. as long as i keep getting your woman-hating bile (which i don’t see being dished out to any male commenters, go figure…), i’ll keep fighting back. you called down the thunder, you semi-literate loser.try and post a comment without any idiotic typos… i dare you!

Anonymous

Actually, I don’t think I was being cheap at all. Just truthful.
Your hate spewing is really not necessary.
I have nothing against feminist and worship the goddess myself.
I treat ever PERSON as an equal.
I am past the ego.
If you really read what I said…I don’t agree with it..it’s just the way it is right now.
I didn’t call you names or degrade you, just made an assumption…most woman that talk as you do…Hate Men.
And yes MODERATOR can we do something about this….personal attacks for no reason….every comment she makes is rude, and degrading to men.

gemmarama

as much fun as this has been, you really are beyond help.

i have better things to do than explain the myriad ways in which you are wrong, wrong, wrong.

you may care to note that it is YOUR comment that has been removed, not mine.

nighty night fool.

Anonymous

you ‘treat everyone equal’ but don’t consider that women might be motivated to look good, be healthy, buy shit solely for themselves. Instead “they wear them to seek approval from men”.